7x64 cartridge/rifle clue me up

[CBH Australia]

So, I’ve long thought that a 7mm-08 would be a good round for my wife.
A few years back I read about 7x57,.280,.280ai etc.
I have a 7mm-08 and a .280ai

I was speaking to my wife about setting up a 7-08 for her when I saw a deal on used-guns for a 7x64 with dies and cases.
I like the 7mm calibre in general so, Bam, another impulse buy because I sort of like the idea of a classic cartridge.

The 7x64 is for my wife so I’m thinking I will start with lighter loads and get her comfortable with it then I can increase to standard loads if she takes to it.

Basically I’m hoping I can load it to mimic 7mm-08 loads and work up if she decides to hunt with it. If not I can hunt with it to see how it goes.

 

[Wyatt Smith]

You got me curious so I looked up some 280 load data (they didn’t list the 7x64) on hodgons website. They show a starting of Varget behind a 160 at 2350. That should be a very doable load. I think it will make a fine rifle for your wife.

 

[Longwalker]

I predict that you and your wife will like the 7x64! I have three 7x64 rifles and each one shoots accurately, with little fuss, and kills well. I’ve found most 7x64 rifle shoot longer ( heavy for caliber or all copper) bullets better than the lightweights. 160 - 175 gr. Seem best for Lead core bullets, 140-160gr. in all copper bullets like Barnes tsx or the Lapua. But there are some exceptions, my Sako 85 also shoots the little RWS cone point 120 grain bullets accurately and very fast. Have fun experimenting!

 

[PerH]

Brenneke – German Hunting Guns

Some good history and info about the 7x64 here

 

[Hearties]

Fantastic cartridge and a firm favourite here in SA. Typically fast twist (1:8.7”) and long throat mean that it outperforms the 280 Rem with heavier projectiles (160gr +). I have a CZ550 and love it.

 

[7x57Joe]

I predict that you will find the 7x64 to your liking and the recoil is modest in my CZ-550 FS. I mostly shoot 139 and sometimes 154/160 grain bullets in mine as I only hunt whitetail deer anymore.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

@

So, I’ve long thought that a 7mm-08 would be a good round for my wife.
A few years back I read about 7x57,.280,.280ai etc.
I have a 7mm-08 and a .280ai

I was speaking to my wife about setting up a 7-08 for her when I saw a deal on used-guns for a 7x64 with dies and cases.
I like the 7mm calibre in general so, Bam, another impulse buy because I sort of like the idea of a classic cartridge.

The 7x64 is for my wife so I’m thinking I will start with lighter loads and get her comfortable with it then I can increase to standard loads if she takes to it.

Basically I’m hoping I can load it to mimic 7mm-08 loads and work up if she decides to hunt with it. If not I can hunt with it to see how it goes.

CBH Australia
About time you bought your lovely wife a real rifle instead of that horrible little 243. She will love her new 7mm
Bob

 

[CBH Australia]

@

CBH Australia
About time you bought your lovely wife a real rifle instead of that horrible little 243. She will love her new 7mm
Bob

She’s also happy with the .243

 

[FlyGuy]

Phenominal cartridge!

 

[rookhawk]

The biggest advantage a 7x64 has over a 280 Rem is the gun. You have to look pretty hard to find an ugly or low quality 7x64, whereas you have to look long and hard for a 280 on a mauser or similar action of high quality.

I bought my son a 7x64 mauser custom when he was 8 and he's used it all over the place for the past five years. New Mexico for Oryx, Zim for Eland, Kudu, Wildebeest, Zebra, and other. Wisconsin for deer.

It's a wonderful caliber and it has a lot of versatility. It also has a bit more oomph than a 7x57 which is also a wonderful caliber. With a properly fitting gun and a good recoil pad, any woman or child should have no trouble shooting a 7x64 well off sticks with no flinch.

 

[One Day...]

The 7x64 is one of the best cartridges around, very similar to the American .280 that really never caught up likely due to the .270 anteriority and Outdoor Life’s Jack O’Connor's fanatical endorsement.

The big advantage of the 7x64 / .280 over the .270 is that it can shoot heavier bullets* (up to 175 gr) which positions it squarely in .30 caliber power territory, and with the 150 gr bullet, the .280 Remington is easy to shoot and actually slightly faster than the .270 Winchester.

* no issue whatsoever for the 7x64 which has a standard twist rate of 1 in 8.66", but beware with the .280 Rem as there is no industry standard and some have 1 in 8", 1 in 9" or even 1 in 10" like the .270 Win. To stabilize long heavy bullets, the .280 Rem needs 1 in 8" or 1 in 9".

If memory serves, the 7x64 takes 1 more grain of powder than the .280, so think of it as in between 7mm-08 and .280 AI.

True lovers of the 7x64 / .280 often say that the 7 mm Magnum is nothing more than a loud 7x64 / .280, and they are not very far from the truth and of course you would know that well due to the fact that you already have a .280 AI

 

[CBH Australia]

@rookhawk I wish this was a custom Mauser but it’s, another Tikka.
I was watching a Ruger M77 in 7x64 trying to think why I “need” it. Price was good and it’s Blued Timber and a CRF ruger.

Then this Tikka pops up with a Boyd’s thumb hole, dies cases and projectiles for the same price.

@One Day... I have never had a .270 or read much of Jack O’Connor stuff as I read Australian magazines.

The .270 is popular here but I’ve always found a .308 versatile here.

Bruce Moulds had a .280 and 9.3x64 and was using a .284 for his competition rifle. He preferred the .280 over .270 and I’m pretty sure there is a thread on AH discussing that.

Yes I have a .280ai and I’m am very impressed with it and I like the cool case design.
The downfall if any it’s not a pretty rifle it’s a C/F barrel and C/F stock. Things came together and I built up a light weight rifle opportunistically because I was getting out a bit.

This 7x64 comes with a radial brake that arrived this morning in a package with the components and dies. Not fussed on a brake but let’s see. It’s supposed to be the wife’s rifle but I’m keen to try it. I just think 7mm seems to be a sweet spot for performance, projectile availability and moderate recoil cartridges punching above their weight. That’s why I’m thinking in a pinch I can literally download to 7mm-08 velocity’s if required, even if it’s just to build confidence and build up.
That’s based on the premise that .280 data is interchangeable with 7x64 data and with little 7x64 data available for Aussie powders I looked at 280 data that shows 4 powders readily available that suit.
With AR2206H (H4895) able to loaded safely at 60% of max load it gives me a wide range of velocities that I can target from low recoil rounds to proper plains game cartridge performance..
I think a 120gn projectile at around 3000fps is probably fast enough and flat enough for most of what my wife will want to shoot.
As an added bonus the seller has also shared load data for the 162 Hornady ELD-X that came with it.
Downloading might seem like a step backward but initially all I wanted was a 7mm-08 for her, yet here we are.

 

[rookhawk]

@rookhawk I wish this was a custom Mauser but it’s, another Tikka.
I was watching a Ruger M77 in 7x64 trying to think why I “need” it. Price was good and it’s Blued Timber and a CRF ruger.

Then this Tikka pops up with a Boyd’s thumb hole, dies cases and projectiles for the same price.

@One Day... I have never had a .270 or read much of Jack O’Connor stuff as I read Australian magazines.

The .270 is popular here but I’ve always found a .308 versatile here.

Bruce Moulds had a .280 and 9.3x64 and was using a .284 for his competition rifle. He preferred the .280 over .270 and I’m pretty sure there is a thread on AH discussing that.

Yes I have a .280ai and I’m am very impressed with it and I like the cool case design.
The downfall if any it’s not a pretty rifle it’s a C/F barrel and C/F stock. Things came together and I built up a light weight rifle opportunistically because I was getting out a bit.

This 7x64 comes with a radial brake that arrived this morning in a package with the components and dies. Not fussed on a brake but let’s see. It’s supposed to be the wife’s rifle but I’m keen to try it. I just think 7mm seems to be a sweet spot for performance, projectile availability and moderate recoil cartridges punching above their weight. That’s why I’m thinking in a pinch I can literally download to 7mm-08 velocity’s if required, even if it’s just to build confidence and build up.
That’s based on the premise that .280 data is interchangeable with 7x64 data and with little 7x64 data available for Aussie powders I looked at 280 data that shows 4 powders readily available that suit.
With AR2206H (H4895) able to loaded safely at 60% of max load it gives me a wide range of velocities that I can target from low recoil rounds to proper plains game cartridge performance..
I think a 120gn projectile at around 3000fps is probably fast enough and flat enough for most of what my wife will want to shoot.
As an added bonus the seller has also shared load data for the 162 Hornady ELD-X that came with it.
Downloading might seem like a step backward but initially all I wanted was a 7mm-08 for her, yet here we are.

@CBH Australia low recoil rounds aren’t worth the trouble or bother in a 7x64 brenneke. The “Full max load” in an average scoped rifle produces 17lbs-19lbs of felt recoil.

I’m not familiar with the Australian powders, but finding the powder that achieves a given velocity with a given bullet with the least grains is the way to go. Don’t quote me as I don’t have my load data handy, but if Reloder 15 or 19, or IMR4064 are in the powder list, they are notorious for being low recoil and highly accurate at starting load velocities.

If the recoil is still a bit much, put mercury in the stock for target practice off sticks, remove it for hunting.

Without diminishing the loads at all, just by selecting the right powders and perhaps a bit of mercury in the stock, you’ll get the gun down to about 12lbs of felt recoil, that’s roughly half a 30-06, and only 50% more than a 243. (And actually, the same as a 7-08 or 7x57)

 

[Longwalker]

No worries using .280 Rem data for loading the 7x64. The experience I’ve had with seven different factory standard 7x64 rifles is that they all could digest loads over published “max” standard .280 Rem loads.
If your 7x64 shoots the reduced loads accurately, you and your wife will have the best of both worlds, mild loads for practise and smaller game, and full power thumpers that take no backseat to most 7 mm magnums.

 

[CBH Australia]

I will look into Reloader 15 etc.
there is a table of powder equivalents in the manual.
Image below is just quoting a response from ADI on the Hodgdon labelled ADI produced products.

 

[rookhawk]

AR2209 also known as H4350 looks promising. Gets to speed with fewer grains than all the rest. Reloder 19 may also be suitable if sold in your region.

 

[rookhawk]

H4350 @ 47 grains and 2730fps from an 8 pound gun = 15lbs of recoil. Put a scope on the gun, get it to 9lbs = 13.4lbs of recoil. Add a half pound of mercury for a total weight of 9.5lbs = 12.7lbs of felt recoil. (Assuming a 140gr bullet)

The gun is going to be a pussy cat to shoot. I cannot think of a caliber that can do as much as the 7x64 with so little push.

Just checked more data: Yes. Varget is an excellent powder for low recoil in 140gr loads. H414 seems to be the sweetheart for 160gr bullets if taming recoil at full loads is the goal.

 

[CBH Australia]

I have load data available for 4 different ADI powders.
Is there a direct correlation between burn rate and recoil?
Is faster or slower burning powder known for producing less recoils in a given charge weight or corresponding projectile weight!

The load data supplied shows he was using AR2213sc (4813sc) for the 162 gn projectilr and said that it has less recoil than his .308.

On the other end of the burn rate the fastest powder listed is AR2206H (H4895) and we use that as it suits a variety of cartridges.

The table below shows the approximate burn rate equivalents of several brands but Hodgdon match being produced by ADI.

Reloaded 15 and 19 are on the slower end of the scale.
Load data is easy to come by but the imported powders are not. Potentially the same principle of those slower powder equivalents may give lower recoil.

I use AR2213 in the .280ai

 

[rookhawk]

I have load data available for 4 different ADI powders.
Is there a direct correlation between burn rate and recoil?
Is faster or slower burning powder known for producing less recoils in a given charge weight or corresponding projectile weight!

The load data supplied shows he was using AR2213sc (4813sc) for the 162 gn projectilr and said that it has less recoil than his .308.

On the other end of the burn rate the fastest powder listed is AR2206H (H4895) and we use that as it suits a variety of cartridges.

The table below shows the approximate burn rate equivalents of several brands but Hodgdon match being produced by ADI.

Reloaded 15 and 19 are on the slower end of the scale.
Load data is easy to come by but the imported powders are not. Potentially the same principle of those slower powder equivalents may give lower recoil.

I use AR2213 in the .280ai
View attachment 628168

Burn rate has no obvious relevance to recoil. What I do for my kids is this:

Step 1 - Look at all the reloading data you can find. Find the powders that use the fewest grains to achieve “normal” velocities. Pay particular attention to the magical coincidence that the starting load happens to be the most accurate load.

Step 2 - Google “felt recoil calculator” and you can plug in the weight of gun, velocity, grains of powder, and bullet weight.

What you’ll find is it’s just math, any powder that does “the same work” with fewer grains is part of the felt recoil formula. Efficient powders reduce kick because grain weight squared is a portion of the recoil formula.

 

[CBH Australia]

H4350 @ 47 grains and 2730fps from an 8 pound gun = 15lbs of recoil. Put a scope on the gun, get it to 9lbs = 13.4lbs of recoil. Add a half pound of mercury for a total weight of 9.5lbs = 12.7lbs of felt recoil. (Assuming a 140gr bullet)

The gun is going to be a pussy cat to shoot. I cannot think of a caliber that can do as much as the 7x64 with so little push.

Excellent, I will see how I go.
She has fired a .308 ok but ideally I just want to be sure that she is completely comfortable with it and handles it well.
If it’s going to be her rifle I just want to be sure it’s just right. I want her to feel comfortable to squeeze the trigger when a shot presents. We will get range time but I want her to feel confident each time.
Not sure about adding Mercury atm.
It kinda started out that I have a pink B&C full aluminium bedded fibreglass stock that is new in box. My 7mm-08 is the medium barrel CTR or I might have fitted that.
As for weight, then it won’t hurt if the scope is marginally heavier like a Meopta or the like. I can easily find some scopes at 4-5oz heavier than a Leupold .

on reading @rookhawk last post then I will go back to load data. I think AR2206H is often using a lighter charge weight. This may be because of grain size but also using less grains is less cost and it seems to be the most versatile. That said it’s not always the fastest but then that’s back to it being closer to 7-08 performance then working up if required.
I will read up on the ADI load data to see which is the most efficient in the .280 as it’s the only available data and seems to be under the max allowable for 7x64 even at max load.

It will be interesting to get it set up and weigh a few Tikkas to see what difference there is among those I have and to see where this weighs in at.